Player Discussion 2019 Draft

[Ace Rimmer]

BPA is a fine philosophy but after the first 15 picks it gets pretty murky. All I'm saying is if there's a pick to be made between another smallish all skill waterbug type(our prospect pool seems to have a lot of them) and a bigger player with some speed that likes to get in on the forecheck that are similarly rated then I'd like to see some more diversity in the pool.

That's how you wind up with Hunter Smith instead of Brayden Point.

 

[Bounces R Way]

That's how you wind up with Hunter Smith instead of Brayden Point.

Poor scouting is how you end up with Hunter Smith instead of Brayden Point. That was a bad pick right from the get go.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

That's how you wind up with Hunter Smith instead of Brayden Point.

Or Granlund and Wotherspoon instead of Kucherov.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Poor scouting is how you end up with Hunter Smith instead of Brayden Point. That was a bad pick right from the get go.

Well that’s exactly what you’re advocating. Purposely ignoring skill in favour of “grit”.

 

[Volica]

I said it earlier.
I'd be surprised if Calgary made this pick come draft day. That being said, if they do... just BPA. BPA all day. Everyday. Twice on Sundays.

How blown away would you guys be if Calgary picked up Spencer Knight? He could fall because of position.

My bet is on Nolan Foote, Ville Heinola or, more likely, Nils Hoglander. Those three guys just seem like Calgary picks.

 

[Flameshomer]

I agree with shooting for the american goalie prospect. Alternately I say we trade brodie for another first and then try to package ours and that one for a pick around 10 and see if one of cozens or dach falls.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Well that’s exactly what you’re advocating. Purposely ignoring skill in favour of “grit”.

Forechecking is a skill. So is physicality. Just like shooting and passing. In the context of the game of hockey so are physical traits like height and weight really.

Zavgorodny
Phillips
Dube
Mangiapane
MEP

Apart from Gawdin none of the top forward prospects under 22 are even 6'0. It's clear the Flames shifted their drafting philosophy in the last several years. Fine, good, great by me, I don't have anything against smaller skill. Just saying that they might want to throw in a bit of size to that group. The four teams that made the conference finals last year were all big. TBL have some monsters on defense, the Jets might just have the biggest team in the league, Vegas and Washington both have some really big players that can play. I'm not advocating just drafting some bang and crash type just for the sake of it, but if there's a forward that has some nice totals and has that dimension to his game then I'd be all over it.

 

[Sparky93]

Forechecking is a skill. So is physicality. Just like shooting and passing. In the context of the game of hockey so are physical traits like height and weight really.

Zavgorodny
Phillips
Dube
Mangiapane
MEP

Apart from Gawdin none of the top forward prospects under 22 are even 6'0. It's clear the Flames shifted their drafting philosophy in the last several years. Fine, good, great by me, I don't have anything against smaller skill. Just saying that they might want to throw in a bit of size to that group. The four teams that made the conference finals last year were all big. TBL have some monsters on defense, the Jets might just have the biggest team in the league, Vegas and Washington both have some really big players that can play. I'm not advocating just drafting some bang and crash type just for the sake of it, but if there's a forward that has some nice totals and has that dimension to his game then I'd be all over it.

I know what you’re saying, a little more size would be nice but it’s still gotta be BPA. The last 3 drafts we’ve made 19 sections and 11 of them were 6’ or better. 9 of them were taller than 6’1. All the guys that you listed were 4th round or lower, with the exception of Dube. If we’re going to take a flyer on smaller, high skill guys, that’s exactly when I’d like to be doing it.

 

[Nanuuk]

Flames are set to sign 5'10" 178 lb. RHS C Luke Philps from the University of Alberta Golden Bears.

Sorry, I didn't know where else to post this, but as we do not have a 2nd or 6th this year, Tre is looking around.

 

[Fig]

BPA is a fine philosophy but after the first 15 picks it gets pretty murky. All I'm saying is if there's a pick to be made between another smallish all skill waterbug type(our prospect pool seems to have a lot of them) and a bigger player with some speed that likes to get in on the forecheck that are similarly rated then I'd like to see some more diversity in the pool.

Eh... you know BPA is more a theory about maximizing the value of the picks at the draft and not really the lists, right? Then there's the part where the lists are all subjective and not all teams have the same list. Essentially, you choose the player in the highest tier on your list. If multiple players in that tier or you really don't need a player in a specific position, you consider trading down instead. You never want to waste pick value on need. Most teams often will lose value if they draft for need. It's not common that a team will be lucky enough to draft BPA and need at the same time.

Poor scouting is how you end up with Hunter Smith instead of Brayden Point. That was a bad pick right from the get go.

Not quite. Scouts scout a ton of players and compile info on all of them. They then figure out ways to apply values to certain traits and then give that information to management to sort. This is why Button has been around for so damn long even with crazy flubbed picks. It's because management shuffled the data in a way that made it useless.

Or Granlund and Wotherspoon instead of Kucherov.

Again, not scouting. Scouting identified Kucherov was an excellent player worth drafting, but wasn't sure where to slot him. It was management who decided that they could draft him in the later rounds and missed out.

Apart from Gawdin none of the top forward prospects under 22 are even 6'0. It's clear the Flames shifted their drafting philosophy in the last several years. Fine, good, great by me, I don't have anything against smaller skill. Just saying that they might want to throw in a bit of size to that group. The four teams that made the conference finals last year were all big. TBL have some monsters on defense, the Jets might just have the biggest team in the league, Vegas and Washington both have some really big players that can play. I'm not advocating just drafting some bang and crash type just for the sake of it, but if there's a forward that has some nice totals and has that dimension to his game then I'd be all over it.

I feel like you're just giving different ranking to the prospect attributes and shuffling the order. IMO, it's pretty awesome that those late picks look to have NHL potential even a few seasons after being drafted. I personally think scouting is just the first step, it's the development and fit that's more important. The Flames have a better development system to bring the most out of the small skilled guys and are thus getting higher returns on those guys and lower returns on others. Washington and Winnipeg seem to have a system that's better suited in getting higher returns in those bigger dudes. If we need size, I think we're better off trading for it and if you look at Treliving's trade record, he does do that.

I know what you’re saying, a little more size would be nice but it’s still gotta be BPA. The last 3 drafts we’ve made 19 sections and 11 of them were 6’ or better. 9 of them were taller than 6’1. All the guys that you listed were 4th round or lower, with the exception of Dube. If we’re going to take a flyer on smaller, high skill guys, that’s exactly when I’d like to be doing it.

I think I recall an interview where the GM mandate shifted towards selecting more boom vs bust prospects vs "well rounded" lower tier players. The philosophy is that those later round are more gambles anyways. Better to try and quickly win $100 than grind out a few bucks over a longer period of time.

IMO, I think Button should be given a little more free reign in rounds 3 and later. He's actually been very good at finding talent in later rounds.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Forechecking is a skill. So is physicality. Just like shooting and passing. In the context of the game of hockey so are physical traits like height and weight really.

Which is fine - if it fits into their overall game and that player's the current "best" of the remaining players, when considering all of the factors.

It's why score sheet darlings always seem to fall in the draft - their game is incomplete and they are therefore "not the best"

To go out and draft someone just because "big and hits" is not ideal if they're an equally incomplete player.

 

[Bounces R Way]

I know what you’re saying, a little more size would be nice but it’s still gotta be BPA. The last 3 drafts we’ve made 19 sections and 11 of them were 6’ or better. 9 of them were taller than 6’1. All the guys that you listed were 4th round or lower, with the exception of Dube. If we’re going to take a flyer on smaller, high skill guys, that’s exactly when I’d like to be doing it.

Eh... you know BPA is more a theory about maximizing the value of the picks at the draft and not really the lists, right? Then there's the part where the lists are all subjective and not all teams have the same list. Essentially, you choose the player in the highest tier on your list. If multiple players in that tier or you really don't need a player in a specific position, you consider trading down instead. You never want to waste pick value on need. Most teams often will lose value if they draft for need. It's not common that a team will be lucky enough to draft BPA and need at the same time.

I feel like you're just giving different ranking to the prospect attributes and shuffling the order. IMO, it's pretty awesome that those late picks look to have NHL potential even a few seasons after being drafted. I personally think scouting is just the first step, it's the development and fit that's more important. The Flames have a better development system to bring the most out of the small skilled guys and are thus getting higher returns on those guys and lower returns on others. Washington and Winnipeg seem to have a system that's better suited in getting higher returns in those bigger dudes. If we need size, I think we're better off trading for it and if you look at Treliving's trade record, he does do that.

Theory, philosophy, whatever you want to call it BPA is something we fans throw out all the time as if it's some ironclad specific strategy. Just pick the "best" one, as if drafting were that easy. If it was every team would have the exact same draft list. I do agree we've found some value looking for skill in the later rounds(Gaudreau perfect example). Even if Phillips or MEP don't find NHL success I'd still say they were good picks.

There's always going to be some attributes some scouts and management teams value over others. I like that we've been picking smart players lately for instance. All I'm saying when I look at our current pool I see a bit of a lack of speedy size and physicality. If there's a top 40 talent that has those things in their game with our pick wherever it ends up, then I'd like to see the Flames target someone like that. Especially if they skate well.

Which is fine - if it fits into their overall game and that player's the current "best" of the remaining players, when considering all of the factors.

It's why score sheet darlings always seem to fall in the draft - their game is incomplete and they are therefore "not the best"

To go out and draft someone just because "big and hits" is not ideal if they're an equally incomplete player.

Again, that's not what I'm saying. You draft a player in the 1st round he better have a well enough rounded game already to justify being up there. Just saying when I look at the group of forward prospects a notable omission is a high floor physical forechecking forward type. "Grit" might not be as an important factor in the current NHL as it was, doesn't at all mean it's a non-factor. The average NHLer continues to get bigger every year, as they've done for most of the league's existence.

 

[Fig]

Theory, philosophy, whatever you want to call it BPA is something we fans throw out all the time as if it's some ironclad specific strategy. Just pick the "best" one, as if drafting were that easy. If it was every team would have the exact same draft list. I do agree we've found some value looking for skill in the later rounds(Gaudreau perfect example). Even if Phillips or MEP don't find NHL success I'd still say they were good picks.

There's always going to be some attributes some scouts and management teams value over others. I like that we've been picking smart players lately for instance. All I'm saying when I look at our current pool I see a bit of a lack of speedy size and physicality. If there's a top 40 talent that has those things in their game with our pick wherever it ends up, then I'd like to see the Flames target someone like that. Especially if they skate well.

Again, that's not what I'm saying. You draft a player in the 1st round he better have a well enough rounded game already to justify being up there. Just saying when I look at the group of forward prospects a notable omission is a high floor physical forechecking forward type. "Grit" might not be as an important factor in the current NHL as it was, doesn't at all mean it's a non-factor. The average NHLer continues to get bigger every year, as they've done for most of the league's existence.

Question, what are your thoughts on guys like Rychel? We essentially traded Shinkaruk and Granlund for him. I am also curious to know what you think of guys like Bouma and Ferland. Are those the types of guys you hope to have in the pool? Bouma was awesome until his body broke down. I get what you mean, but longer term, I think guys like Granlund are worth more long term than guys like Bouma due to longevity of career.

A mix of both skill and sandpaper is ideal and dudes like Tkachuk and Bennett are nearly unicorns. I kinda see why management drafts the way they do though. You're far more likely to get good value on boom or bust type players like Gaudreau/Point/Kucherov than on brutes like Stone/Prust/Benn etc.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Question, what are your thoughts on guys like Rychel? We essentially traded Shinkaruk and Granlund for him. I am also curious to know what you think of guys like Bouma and Ferland. Are those the types of guys you hope to have in the pool? Bouma was awesome until his body broke down. I get what you mean, but longer term, I think guys like Granlund are worth more long term than guys like Bouma due to longevity of career.

A mix of both skill and sandpaper is ideal and dudes like Tkachuk and Bennett are nearly unicorns. I kinda see why management drafts the way they do though. You're far more likely to get good value on boom or bust type players like Gaudreau/Point/Kucherov than on brutes like Stone/Prust/Benn etc.

Too slow and poor puck skills, though I haven't really seen all that much of him. Was never a fan of Granlund and still not, though I think he had more talent than Bouma. Just didn't do anything quick enough to be an above average player. Ferland I loved, although I thought he was miscast as a #1RW. His terrorizing of Vancouver's D in that 2015 series was the stuff of legends. Bouma had a couple good years too but injuries took their toll, his speed made him a good forechecker. Shinkaruk I liked his shot and he had decent hands but not much else.

Boom/Bust is fine with me for rounds 3-7, even occasionally earlier if the boom is tantalizing enough. It's size and speed together that I'm looking for for our prospect pool. Somebody who can play middle 6 and be top 30 in hits. That Josh Anderson had 4 hits tonight and did a good job disrupting our defense. The rest of his game isn't all world or anything but with that it's enough to make him an effective player. I want a guy who makes a defenseman check over his shoulder once or twice, forces turnovers, drives the net, another disruptor like Bennett can be when he's on.

 

[The Gnome]

Too slow and poor puck skills, though I haven't really seen all that much of him. Was never a fan of Granlund and still not, though I think he had more talent than Bouma. Just didn't do anything quick enough to be an above average player. Ferland I loved, although I thought he was miscast as a #1RW. His terrorizing of Vancouver's D in that 2015 series was the stuff of legends. Bouma had a couple good years too but injuries took their toll, his speed made him a good forechecker. Shinkaruk I liked his shot and he had decent hands but not much else.

Boom/Bust is fine with me for rounds 3-7, even occasionally earlier if the boom is tantalizing enough. It's size and speed together that I'm looking for for our prospect pool. Somebody who can play middle 6 and be top 30 in hits. That Josh Anderson had 4 hits tonight and did a good job disrupting our defense. The rest of his game isn't all world or anything but with that it's enough to make him an effective player. I want a guy who makes a defenseman check over his shoulder once or twice, forces turnovers, drives the net, another disruptor like Bennett can be when he's on.

I agree with the thought, but I'd rather try and acquire another Bennett via trade. Guys who dominate physically at a young age, but are mediocre stats wise always raise a red flag for me. There is no denying our team is soft though. Look at Vegas post Stone trade, they are 9-1. Adding in Stone is another large body on that team, who also has near elite skill. The flames at least need another 1-2 Anderson types to keep these guys in check.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

I really like Lassi Thompson’s game. Moves the puck extremely well. I think I’d pick him
up over Honka.

I’d almost peg him as a right-handed Valimaki, but I think Thompson is better at creating initial separation from forecheckers than Valimaki. Like, I think Juuso struggles coming out of puck retrievals in a position to make a play a lot of the time, but I don’t see that with Lassi.

McKenzie has him at #35 and I think that’s sleeping on him from what I’ve seen.

 

[Anglesmith]

I really like Lassi Thompson’s game.

Let me guess, fetches the puck well, senses danger in the defensive end and has a nose for the net?

 

[SmellOfVictory]

Or Granlund and Wotherspoon instead of Kucherov.

Wotherspoon for sure, but Granlund and Kucherov were the same size at the draft, I believe.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

Let me guess, fetches the puck well, senses danger in the defensive end and has a nose for the net?

Well, done

 

[BigRangy]

So who do ya like at 26?

 

[Ace Rimmer]

So who do ya like at 26?

Is the pick #26 or is it re-seeded based on playoffs?

 

[MonyontheMoney]

Is the pick #26 or is it re-seeded based on playoffs?

#26

Tampa is at 27, so that makes sense

 

[MonyontheMoney]

So who do ya like at 26?

I think ideally for me one of Newhook, Soderstrom, Bjornfot or Hoglander are there.

I also like Legare, but I’d clearly prefer one of the above 4.

Seider is also interesting, but it’s really tough to find much film of him.

 

[super6646]

I think ideally for me one of Newhook, Soderstrom, Bjornfot or Hoglander are there.

I also like Legare, but I’d clearly prefer one of the above 4.

Seider is also interesting, but it’s really tough to find much film of him.

Who the f*** are they? Honestly don’t follow prospects a lot, but damn those are no names.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

Who the **** are they? Honestly don’t follow prospects a lot, but damn those are no names.

I mean, we’re at 26, so it’s not like a person who doesn’t follow prospects would know a lot of those names, but still not really “no-names”.

Newhook ranked 27 by Button, 12 by Cosentino, 20 by McKenzie, and 17 by Central Scouting.

Soderstrom ranked 20 by Button, 13 by Cosentino, 17 by McKenzie, and 31 by Central Scouting.

Bjornfot ranked 23 by Button, NR by Cosentino, NR by McKenzie, and 29 by Central Scouting.

Hoglander NR by Button, Cosentino or Central Scouting, but 29 by McKenzie and is commonly ranked at the backend of the 1st by many.

If anything it’s wishful thinking that Newhook or Soderstrom will be there at 26, not that they’re “no-names”.